The Environmental Impact Assessment of Concrete
碩士 === 大葉大學 === 環境工程學系碩士班 === 100 === In this study life cycle assessment software SimaPro7.1 was used as analysis tool, with Eco-Indicator 95 and Eco-Indicator 99 to evaluate the environmental impact of concrete in the various stages of the production process. Using Eco-Indicator 95 cement producti...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Others |
| Language: | zh-TW |
| Published: |
2012
|
| Online Access: | http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/71304436397519378854 |
| Summary: | 碩士 === 大葉大學 === 環境工程學系碩士班 === 100 === In this study life cycle assessment software SimaPro7.1 was used as analysis tool, with Eco-Indicator 95 and Eco-Indicator 99 to evaluate the environmental impact of concrete in the various stages of the production process. Using Eco-Indicator 95 cement production stage was the greatest impact(9.45 × 10-2 Pt) for traditional concrete; while the sand and gravel transport phase was the greatest impact (5.84 × 10-2 Pt) for blast furnace concrete and furnace slag and fly ash concrete. The Eco-Indicator 99 damage assessment of three concrete shows that traditional concrete are larger than other two in human health, ecosystem quality and resources. The impact of the blast furnace concrete was the lowest. Overall, the traditional concrete used more cement and created the greatest environmental impact. Other two kinds of concrete replaced 50% of cement by pozzolanic materials can reduce the environmental impact points approximately 44%.
|
|---|